If puzzles were used as an introduction they'd have to be, well, more tutorial like, less puzzle like. Else I'd have 0 gods available, I know that much

I'd also like more information on gods ingame. Likes, dislikes, desecration punishments perhaps. They're the only thing I had to check the wiki for. DD is otherwise pretty good with giving the info, most other roguelikes would have me reading the wiki constantly.

Yeah, codex will deffinitely help with all this - the devs have mentioned having discussions about it (several times?) and I suspect they were probably discussing, among other things, how much of this stuff is helpful information and how much is just spoilers (simmilar to my own concerns about making video tutorials).

Lujo wrote:Now, as for concrete stuff - what making me sad here is that Bloggorus is right.

I lol'd.

Well that came out wrong

But if you need proof of the "multiplicative theory" there you have it. If enough stuff lets people underuse/ignore gods, and I know they can from all the horrible PQI, then bringing those things into a game with gods lets you have way more power than anyone really needs. Now as for why some people know they don't need that much power, and why some don't - that is a very interesting question regarding overall reception/perception of the game which this thread brought up.

Lujo wrote:Now, as for concrete stuff - what making me sad here is that Bloggorus is right.

I lol'd.

Well that came out wrong

But if you need proof of the "multiplicative theory" there you have it. If enough stuff lets people underuse/ignore gods, and I know they can from all the horrible PQI, then bringing those things into a game with gods lets you have way more power than anyone really needs. Now as for why some people know they don't need that much power, and why some don't - that is a very interesting question regarding overall reception/perception of the game which this thread brought up.

I wrote down a little equation to explain how the economics of the game works a while back, I might try and find it.

As for perception of a game, I find it's usually in the best interest of designers to never make assumptions about how much thought or independence a player/user might have.

I work in web development and design, and in my experience you can never assume that users will perform an action or use a resource in a certain way 'because they can'. As much as some individuals might have the mindset and the independence to seek their own challenges and gameplay away from the norm, 99% of players will follow the signposts and step from quest to quest. Good design guides the user whilst giving them the illusion that they are acting independently.

A good example is the insanely awesome Planetside 2. Amazing example of a mechanic that 'just works', a superb example of an enclosed, working game economy at it's finest, but learning the way the game works presents a massive challenge. The game shipped with zero tutorial, and was universally canned as a result.

After launch, they relied on a huge beta community to keep the game afloat. Things slowly improved as they faced the flames of public and critical reception. Learning the game is still painful, but ultimately rewarding; sound familiar?

I see DD as another amazing 'emergent gameplay' mechanic that, in and of itself, contains almost infinite replay value. Properly tuning this mechanics, whilst providing the right means of introducing players to advanced strategies, its the way forward.

Providing an entire toolkit when only a hammer would suffice is not a bad thing. Without it, I would not have been able to be excited by the win I described a few days back. It would have just been a loss and I would have just had to whine about how I don't understand gods and items don't seem to help me.

Lujo you asked me what I feel like improving is? Improving is succeeding where I once failed. Getting better means learning more places to use more items/gods/spells. Improving is screwing up my early game something fierce(or the game screwing me) and pulling out a win by utilizing something I never noticed/never used/never knew it's benefit. Every time I do that I small percent better chance on the next dungeon of succeeding. When that percent grows enough I can survive the resource hits that vicious dungeons provide.

Oddly enough Vicious HoS is the perfect first vicious to do. Why? Because I already learned it. Now it is just the same thing except harder(require more efficiency). Instead of the other vicious which are something new entirely. I felt like I improved enough from unlocking VHoS(actually one of the first mid game quests I completed) to do vicious and so I did. Granted on one of the best suited classes.. except not really because I struggle with the mana limitations(I actually gun for Mystera lately to make up for it, not sure if that is the best course but it works for me).

I dunno I am rambling now I am not sure I have any more points to make or if I am just repeating myself to hear my voice.

xspeedballx wrote:Improving is succeeding where I once failed. Getting better means learning more places to use more items/gods/spells. Improving is screwing up my early game something fierce(or the game screwing me) and pulling out a win by utilizing something I never noticed/never used/never knew it's benefit. Every time I do that I small percent better chance on the next dungeon of succeeding. When that percent grows enough I can survive the resource hits that vicious dungeons provide.

The big question is whether or not this is happening in Desktop Dungeons.

The typical 'ramping difficulty' gameplay should go:

[*]Attempt a dungeon multiple times.[*]Learn a little each time as you try new tactics and classes.[*]Complete a dungeon at last.[*]Celebrate.[*]Repeat with harder dungeons and quests, utilising the skills you have gained.[*]Learn as you go.

In DD it goes something lke this:

[*]Choose one of many relatively simialrly balanced dungeon.[*]Attempt any of these dungeons multiple times.[*]Learn a little each time as you try new tactics and classes.[*]Complete a dungeon at last.[*]Celebrate.[*]Receive items and gold for kingdom upgrades.[*]Get new toys.[*]Celebrate.[*]Repeat with other dungeons using the skills and preps you have gained.[*]Learn as you go?

The big question is, when you increase items, preps and dungeon resources at the same rate as you go up in difficulty, are you actually learning anything?

You might feel like you are, but it is easy to confuse success with acquiring skill.

Modern RPG's are very good at this, giving you the impression that you are improving when really you are just receiving as big a sword as the enemies you are facing.

Last edited by Bloggorus on Mon Feb 04, 2013 11:53 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Preps help you get to the end of the game(get to hard gaan-talet) which oddly enough requires you to know how to play without preps. Gameplay without preps is badge hunting. That is current design(whether intended or not). We can argue whether or not the game teaches you enough to complete Gaan-talet or not. I feel it does.. somehow because I was able to do it. But I am not a perfect example. Learning tiers probably needs improvement I won't argue that. I am not sure preps need to go, just that maybe the game should push more a few more purist runs here and there in early quests, or have you spend a little more time prepless(except for locker).

Obviously I learned enough to complete HVoH. And enough resource management and maybe not optimal but more efficient techniques to extend the learning.